References
- Wittmaack K. In search of the most relevant parameter for quantifying lung inflammatory response to nanoparticle exposure: particle number, surface area, or what? Env Health Persp 2007;115:187-94.
- Oberdorster G, Oberdorster E, Oberdorster J. Nanotoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Env Health Persp 2005;113:823-39. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7339
- Maynard AD. Nanotechnology: the next big thing, or much ado about nothing? Ann Occup Hyg 2007;51:1-12.
- Ham S, Yoon C, Lee E, Lee K, Park D, Chung E, Kim P, Lee B. Task-based exposure assessment of nanoparticles in the workplace. J Nanopart Res 2012;14:1-17.
- Park JY, Raynor PC, Maynard AD, Eberly LE, Ramachandran G. Comparison of two estimation methods for surface area concentration using number concentration and mass concentration of combustion-related ultrafine particles. Atmos Env 2009;43:502-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.10.020
- Tsai C, Huang C, Chen S, Ho C, Huang C, Chen C, Chang C, Tsai S, Ellenbecker M. Exposure assessment of nano-sized and respirable particles at different workplaces. J Nanopart Res 2011;13:4161-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-011-0361-8
- Maynard AD, Aitken RJ. Assessing exposure to airborne nanomaterials: Current abilities and future requirements. Nanotoxicology 2007;1:26-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/17435390701314720
-
Kaminski H, Beyer M, Fissan H, Asbach C, Kuhlbusch TA. Measurements of nanoscale
$TiO_2$ and$Al_2O_3$ in industrial workplace environmentsemethodology and results. Aero Air Qual Res 2015;15:129-41. - Heitbrink WA, Evans DE, Ku BK, Maynard AD, Slavin TJ, Peters TM. Relationships among particle number, surface area, and respirable mass concentrations in automotive engine manufacturing. J Occup Env Hyg 2008;6:19-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/15459620802530096
- Asbach C, Kaminski H, Von Barany D, Kuhlbusch TAJ, Monz C, Dziirowitz N, Pelzer J, Vossen K, Berlin K, Dietrich S, Gotz U, Kiesling HJ, Schierl R, Dahmann D. Comparability of portable nanoparticle exposure monitors. Ann Occup Hyg 2012;56:606-21.
- Fierz M, Weimer S, Burtscher H. Design and performance of an optimized electrical diffusion battery. J Aero Sci 2009;40:152-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2008.09.007
- Watson JG, Chow JC, Sodeman DA, Lowenthal DH, Chang MCO, Park K, Wang X. Comparison of four scanning mobility particle sizers at the Fresno Supersite. Particuology 2011;9:204-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.partic.2011.03.002
- Wiedensohler A, Birmili W, Nowak A, Sonntag A, Weinhold K, Merkel M, Wehner B, Tuch T, Pfeifer S, Fiebig M. Mobility particle size spectrometers: harmonization of technical standards and data structure to facilitate high quality long-term observations of atmospheric particle number size distributions. Atmos Meas Tech 2012;5:657-85. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-657-2012
- Asbach C, Kaminski H, Fissan H, Monz C, Dahmann D, Mulhopt S, Paur HR, Kiesling HJ, Herrmann F, Voetz M. Comparison of four mobility particle sizers with different time resolution for stationary exposure measurements. J Nanopart Res 2009;11:1593-609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-009-9679-x
- Joshi M, Sapra B, Khan A, Tripathi S, Shamjad P, Gupta T, Mayya Y. Harmonisation of nanoparticle concentration measurements using GRIMM and TSI scanning mobility particle sizers. J Nanopart Res 2012;14:1-14.
- Reiman MP, Manske RC. Functional testing in human performance. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics; 2009.
- Tritscher T, Beeston M, Zerrath AF, Elzey S, Krinke TJ, Filimundi E, Bischof OF. NanoScan SMPSeA novel, portable nanoparticle sizing and counting instrument. J Phys 2013;429:012061.
- Mulholland GW, Donnelly MK, Hagwood CR, Kukuck SR, Hackley VA, Pui DY. Measurement of 100 nm and 60 nm particle standards by differential mobility analysis. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol 2006;111:257-312. https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.111.022
- Kinney PD, Pui DY. Use of the electrostatic classification method to 0.1 tm SRM particles-a feasibility study. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol 1991;96:147-76. https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.096.006
- Ham S, Kim S, Lee N, Kim P, Eom I, Tsai PJ, Lee K, Yoon C. Comparison of nanoparticle exposure levels based on facility typedsmall-scale laboratories, large-scale manufacturing workplaces, and unintended nanoparticle-emitting workplaces. Aero Air Qual Res 2015;15:1967-78.
- Zimmerman N, Godri Pollitt KJ, Jeong C-H, Wang JM, Jung T, Cooper JM, Wallace JS, Evans GJ. Comparison of three nanoparticle sizing instruments: the influence of particle morphology. Atmos Environ 2014;86:140-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.12.023
- Liu PS, Deshler T. Causes of concentration differences between a scanning mobility particle sizer and a condensation particle counter. Aero Sci Tech 2003;37:916-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820300931
- Lawrence I, Lin K. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989;45:255-68. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532051
Cited by
- A System Based on the Internet of Things for Real-Time Particle Monitoring in Buildings vol.15, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15040821
- Comparison of four nanoparticle monitoring instruments relevant for occupational hygiene applications vol.14, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-019-0247-8
- Comparative Performance of the NanoScan and the Classic SMPS in Determining N95 Filtering Facepiece Efficiency Against Nanoparticles vol.4, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41810-020-00064-4